Jump to content

FBI recommends no indictment of HC


IAG
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 359
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Weapons of Mass Destruction... which was a total fabrication.

 

 

I don't care how smart you are and what you "think" you know.  You cannot with 100% certainty say that is correct.

 

I'm not defending Bush, but I will defend the fact that you don't know.

 

There is a chance he was simply given bad intel and made a bad decision based on the information he was given.  You might think its unlikely, but to dismiss it as a possibility is careless and close minded. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The resolution cited many factors as justifying the use of military force against Iraq:[3][4]

 

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.

Iraq "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability" and "actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability" posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."

Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."

Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".

Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.

Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.

Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.

Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them.

The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.

The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.

Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President George W. Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

 

The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care how smart you are and what you "think" you know. You cannot with 100% certainty say that is correct.

 

I'm not defending Bush, but I will defend the fact that you don't know.

 

There is a chance he was simply given bad intel and made a bad decision based on the information he was given. You might think its unlikely, but to dismiss it as a possibility is careless and close minded.

It's his job to make sure he's acting in good Intel. He's the president of the United States, not the pta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't find shit- that's good enough for me. No evidence whatsoever.

 

Weapons of Mass... Distraction

 

So you have never been wrong?  

 

Again, I'm not defending Bush.  But a President can only work with info he is given when making decisions like this.  Same goes for Obama or any other president who makes decisions about our military action. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deemer can come in here and claim that Diabler loves to suck cock on the side.

 

No evidence whatsoever of that... but hey we can't say without 100% certainty, right?

 

In that case, we can say anything about anything, and try to pass it off as true.

 

The fact is, they didn't find a fuckin' firecracker. That's a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...